You must log in or register to comment.
I remember reading a comment saying that women don’t actually want pockets. The manufacturers and retailers have data on this.
What’s happening is the women who do want them are in online bubbles that give them the impression that most women want pockets.
It’s like how most gamers don’t give a shit about DRM, so those of us who know better are stuck with it anyway.
The only data I could find suggests women do want pockets, particularly in pants.
It suggests that young women from the UK want pockets, yes.
I would wager that the companies that stand to gain or lose money has this data. Or you have the opportunity of a lifetime to start a company that would cater to a black hole of demand. I know what i’m betting on.
Is the hypothesis that companies have their customers’ best interests in mind? /shrug I’m just going to base my worldview on the only data I could find rather than “I remember reading a comment.” At least until I run across new data.
Not at all. They have their own interests in mind. It isn’t in their interest to make shit that wont sell 🤷
That data would be business critical for them so you can bet your fucking ass they have something like it.
Planned obsolescence, subscription degradation, ad creep, landfills full of cheap crap… It’s in their interests to sell the least useful thing for the highest price. If it costs more to put in pockets, they’ll spend a surprising amount of money trying to convince people they don’t want pockets. Or better yet, just buy up every competitor until there are only a few players and decide amongst yourselves not to make better stuff. I’m not saying that’s what happened, necessarily, it’s just not a foregone conclusion that pockets are scarce because demand is scarce.
If it costs more to put in pockets, they’ll spend a surprising amount of money trying to convince people they don’t want pockets.
Tin foil engaged.
Public perception can function like any other externality, meaning you can offload costs onto it. This is regularly done, but it’d be foolish to claim that’s the case here without more information. As it would be foolish to assume the hand of the market is gently guiding us to a better world.
Those companies also make handbags, which are substantially more profitable than pants with pockets as long as those companies keep handbags in fashion
There is often a difference between “consumer wants” and “we will not profit enough to bother”
deleted by creator
My SIL doesn’t want pockets, but she is wealthy and into style. I think some of the women who don’t want pockets are into style and/or looking wealthy enough to not need pockets.
Women who are pragmatic want pockets.
I’ve been ripping open pockets and sewing more fabric onto them making them big.
I became aware of this once in the office where a woman brought up the fact that guys were lucky to have functional pockets. Most pockets on womans clothing are either fake or are sewn shut and for looks.
I asked why? And she explained it ruins the “Pants Chi”. I guess it gets in the way of showing off the figure somehow.
So you’ve got a very vocal market calling out their demand for a product that is more or less trivial to manufacture, and yet not a single entrepreneur has successfully brought the product to market. Why would that be?
A quick search confirms that women’s clothing with pockets does in fact exist, so the niche is getting served.
It takes significantly more time in shopping. Online, the normal look at 25 items to find one that matches my style preferences and is available in my size, then add clicking through all the product detail tabs to try to figure out if it has pockets, 80% of them don’t, and of the ones that do it’s mostly hope that they aren’t poorly designed where everything falls out of them upon sitting down.
I appreciate that, with a multiple of the shopping time investment required by men or women who don’t value pockets, and some fallout in unusable pockets, women’s clothing with pockets is available. But I sure wish it was more available.
There are retailers who have pockets in women‘s clothing by default but it does have some marginal cost. In a world of fast fashion, if they can get away with it, they will.
Pay raises
Hell yes, I’m all for it. It’s insanity that we don’t have wage parity at this point
I definitely want pockets. I’ve had a lot of luck with dresses and baggy work pants. The baggy jeans style has also made pockets easier to find. I feel like having to outsource my storage to a bag I carry is a liability.
For too long, feminists have focused on unimportant issues like voting rights, equal pay, and the ability to hold credit cards without a male cosigner. This is the only demand that truly matters for gender equality. If women get pockets, then the rest will follow.
Dead image, no issues with other images on Lemmy, but the image host “slrpnk.net” just doesn’t seem to work.
This happens to me on images from feddit.org. maybe geoblocking? Their website feddit.org doesn’t ever load for me.
I had an issue today with lemmy.zip and it turns out they have cloudfare and it was breaking images for the captchachahcahca.
It works for me
A woman who has everything she wants.
Phosphorus?
Particle Projection Cannons?
And an AWS-8Q to mount them on. Just watch your heat.
Ah the Awesome. It is indeed pretty awesome.
Though I’m a Marauder man personally.
Yes the marauder in all its inceptions is a wonderful machine. I’m planning an all marauder lance for my current playthrough of BTA3062. Marauder II, Nightstar, Marauder IIC, and a MAD-5M (just for nostalgia). All with clan tech
So in the HBS Battletech, my ride of choice is a MAD-3R with 2x + LgLas, ++UAC2 and 2x ++MdLas. Double heatsinks all around and maxed out frontal armor. Combine that with Called Shot Mastery and you can CT one shot most opponents.
Polyps?
I will never understand women moaning about pockets. They had pockets. They had big huge massive pockets that were hidden away inside great big swinging wide legged pantaloons. But women didnt like them, cos they werent skin tight. So they fell out of fashion. You can still get them, but people dont. Cos they want things that cover them like a small condom on a magnum dong.
Christ, some jeans are even doing away with the buttons and the zipper, cos it takes away from the tightness. You all did this to yourselves. You chose looking “sexy” over comfort.
Lol. They chose, right. Uh, mean women
/sarcasm, of course
Yeah, not like they cant just not buy the pocketless skin tight shit… right? I mean, those trousers, with the big pockets are still there in the shops. But the bulk of sales is still going to camel toe showing jeans and leggings. So, yeah. THEY, fucking chose. No matter what the rabble of social media simps and pick me girls wants to say.
those trousers eith the big pockets…
You mean the pants in the mens section?
Removed by mod
Well if it fits… Why not? I haven’t seen those pantaloons anywhere nearby
Except that men’s pants don’t fit at all. Women have curves and men are more… Straight? Plus the crotch area is weird and will rub weirdly if you use men’s pants.
I buy big baggy unisex stuff with gloriously roomy pockets. I’ve always hated skin tight clothing. Fuck fashion, I want comfort and utility.
Lol. You ever saw women’s part of clothes shops?
Yes, have you? And are you still pretending that the demand doesnt drive the supply???
As I already posted, https://www.next.us/en/shop/womens/clothing/trousers/f/style-wideleg?p=1#438 Big pockets in just about all of these. So, lets stop with the lie that woman cant have big pockets. Its a problem of your own making. Because women would rather “look sexy” than be comfortable or have pockets. Vanity drives the small/no pocket market. Nothing else.
Go ahead, https://www.next.us/en/shop/womens/clothing/jeans?p=1#340.26666259765625
All pockets are normal, surely? What a joke
And how many clothes with deep pockets have you seen? Because I have seen exactly fucking zero. Also, you sound like someone who never spoke to a woman, because anyone in their right mind will rather feel comfortable. Add to this another thing: go google women’s clothes designers.
I gave you a link. And for some reason, you gave me a link back with all the shit that women flock to buy.
I dont really get what youre doing here, other being terrified of being wrong. Women buy jeans/trousers with small/no pockets because they want to “look sexy”. The trousers are there. The jeans are there. But no one is buying, and the demand drives the market.
Do you get it now, or do I need to break out the special crayons?
You gave me a link, I gave you a link. You have a problem?
Lol, I get what you are doing here, though: proclaim that things are the way you state they are and that’s it. Well, you can fuck right off here with this kind of thinking
We gotta respect the struggle: my man is out here doing a sociological analysis of the history of women’s fashion even though his brain is capable than no more than a Petri dish worth of depth. Was it a good analysis? No, but he tried and he had courage, never let your limitations shape your destiny.
Ah, the classic personal attack instead of attacking the argument. Social media is such a wonder. Just an endless gaggle of cave brained cunts that have never felt the velvety softness of the back hand when being a prick.
deleted by creator
Dont you hate it when you try to sound like an intellectual, but you just end up coming across as someone so fucking dumb that they bite spoons?
That’s where you’re wrong, buddy, I don’t use spoons
Too difficult for you to figure out?
They’re too rotund
Pocketknives.
Pseks?
There are at least 2 to 3 things that all girls want starting with p and ending with s.
Polar bears? … I seem to remember something about bears being preferred over men.
Pussies?
Pizzas.
